Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


roytam1

My build of New Moon (temp. name) a.k.a. Pale Moon fork targetting XP

Recommended Posts

Might there be a possibility to include a legacy version of the NoScript addon by default in New Moon?  It definetly makes the web much more useable, not only on the old Windows XP machines. The version 2 seems to be good, I use 2.6.9.32 (didn't find any better). The current NoScript version kills the Celeron from 1999.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my server is back up! :D
as such my unofficial installer for roys builds will work again

 

Quote

Might there be a possibility to include a legacy version of the NoScript addon by default in New Moon? 

Whether or not @roytam1 does this himself is up to him, but I was considering adding optional plugin support to my installer. for something like @looking4awayout's installer I have that process planned in my head but I have no ideas on how I would automatically install "normal" add-ons (such as noScript) into the browser. I suppose maybe forcing the browser to open the xpi file but that's sorta crude and not automatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gansangriff said:

Might there be a possibility to include a legacy version of the NoScript addon by default in New Moon?  It definitely makes the web much more usable, not only on the old Windows XP machines. The version 2 seems to be good, I use 2.6.9.32 (didn't find any better). The current NoScript version kills the Celeron from 1999.

Add-ons are installed in your profile folder, not in the browser's program folder (that's how they remain installed whenever you update), so they can't be included in the same .7z file as the browser itself.

That said, old versions of NoScript are readily available for download from the Classic Add-Ons Archive (which is itself an add-on). Go to https://github.com/JustOff/ca-archive/releases and click on the latest .xpi file.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mathiwz said: Add-ons are installed in your profile folder, not in the browser's program folder (that's how they remain installed whenever you update), so they can't be included in the same .7z file as the browser itself.


That said, old versions of NoScript are readily available for download from the Classic Add-Ons Archive (which is itself an add-on). Go to https://github.com/JustOff/ca-archive/releases and click on the latest .xpi file.


Can only speak from very limited experience with older browsers, but K-Meleon has an addon included out-of-7z-box: NewsFox, an rss-reader. Technically it looks quite easy to me, just place an xpi (with it's final name) in folder /browser/extensions. The killer catch is, users will get NO Remove-button on aboutaddons, as if that folder is considered part of the engine. Reminds me of android phones, where owners are only allowed to remove their self-installed apps too, others can only be disabled. Of course such engine addons can still be removed too, provided you have full access to the app's install folder and can manually delete the xpi - unless that has changed in more modern browsers. Not sure. At any rate including addons this way is rather un-friendly on users who do not want a specific heavy or intrusive addon.
So I would not want to see something as NoScript hardcoded in a browser, it's not everyone's cup of tea. But would like some other, basic ones included, like ExExceptions. And in the special case of KM find it important that the old, traditional NewsFox addon comes already included. It's a very tiny and harmless addon which adds basic functions, but most of all it's a demonstration of a working xpi addon in a browser that's so confusing to newbie users, regarding the extensions chaos (macros, complex multi-file KM-extensions, native FF addons etc.) For example out of box KM still doesn't even have any menu entry to open about:addons! And other important about-pages, users must already know those pages exist and can be opened by manually typing the about-addy in the urlbar, which I find completely incredible today. Or users who know about it, can install my tiny KM-macro aboutabout, which just adds a bunch of about-links in a menu. Still looking very rough, because I haven't investigated yet the matching menu positions and names in FF&Co, which is the final goal of course. That KM-GUI prob has historical reasons of course, xpi-addons were completely impossible prior to first KM74 versions, and at first very tricky to install (editing install.rdf and fiddling with prefs). Then slowly getting better with every new KM7x-version. And since KM76RC2 most Firefox-addons install quite fine, but still lack any xpi-created menus and toolbar buttons, rendering most of them useless again. The only chance is if the xpi comes with an own options page, as long as that's enough to handle it. Or if the user can get an additional KM-macro to create menu or buttons, but their interaction with addons is still quite limited too. How to call a native xpi-function by macro? All they can do so far is toggle some pref, or open a xul-url (Like ExExceptions). I've realized only lately they may be able to do a bit more too. Anway, it's a major pity that due to chronical lack of devs K-Meleon's GUI is meanwhile lagging some ten years behind the engine.
But what I find very important in general, for all browsers which can only run 'legacy' XUL-addons, is to give clueless newbie users a hint about ClassicAddonsArchive! This addon I'd absolutely include out-of-box, except that it's impossible because this one is far too heavy, over 40MB. No go. Still, to help unexperienced users, I'm currently working at a K-Meleon macro that modifies the original aboutaddons page and injects a button opening CAA (and other buttons to KM macro ressources, and a little buttonmenu). Realized only lately that's even possible, just by macro with JS and for non-devs like me, still quite excited. When that macro is installed, it will inject those buttons at every page load, and clicking it will open "caa:list" or "caa:about", and if not yet installed the button will offer to download the addon from github.
Of course, for other browsers too, with some dev-power and omni.ja-access, such modifications could be included in the source-code of aboutaddons page directly. If anyone is curious about how that might look, here's a little preview screenshot of my almost-finished macro:
http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=20610227332941181284
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about it, just in theory, another way of including addons out-of-box is probably in the template folder for brandnew profiles:
installdir/browser/defaults/profile/extensions/...
Then it should show a Remove/Uninstall button on aboutaddons, but haven't tested.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, siria said:

K-Meleon has an addon included out-of-7z-box: NewsFox, an rss-reader. Technically it looks quite easy to me, just place an xpi (with it's final name) in folder /browser/extensions. The killer catch is, users will get NO Remove-button on about:addons, as if that folder is considered part of the engine.

Wasn't aware that was possible. Presumably it would work in other browsers besides KM, and one wouldn't even need to modify the source repo: put the desired .xpi files in one of those subfolders after building, then just zip the whole thing up. And CAA would be a perfect candidate - if it didn't double the size of the final .7z! So I guess we won't do that one - too bad JustOff didn't put the CAA database in the cloud.

But after looking over my own rather long list of add-ons, I don't see any (except CAA) that everyone should have - especially when you consider that it's common for different users to want different versions of an add-on. Should we include uBO? If so, New Moon presumably gets the latest legacy version, but which version does Serpent 52 get: the legacy version, 1.17.4, or a newer version patched to run on it?

So maybe we're overthinking this. Instead of including any add-ons in the .7z files, remember that pref that started this whole discussion - startup.homepage_override_url - that opens whenever the browser version changes? Point that to a page of commonly requested addons, then the users will see it after every update and can decide for themselves which addons (if any) they want.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Addon in a browser has to be removable. User cases are different like in terms of hardware, paranoia, skill... even NoScript can be too complicated for beginners.

The ClassicAddonArchive is a very important link to improve the elderly browsers. It so unfortuneatly, that a lot of developers don't like their old software wandering around, causing troubles in the hands of greenhorns. So they try to remove every trace of legacy software.

Edit:
Some low-specification tests: New Moon (which is a cool name by the way) can run semi-fast on a Celeron 400Mhz with Windows XP. You learn to love the extra power of a Pentium 3, but New Moon is useable.

Edited by Gansangriff
Another idea
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gansangriff said:

Every Addon in a browser has to be removable. User cases are different like in terms of hardware, paranoia, skill... even NoScript can be too complicated for beginners.

The ClassicAddonArchive is a very important link to improve the elderly browsers. It so unfortuneatly, that a lot of developers don't like their old software wandering around, causing troubles in the hands of greenhorns. So they try to remove every trace of legacy software.

Edit:
Some low-specification tests: New Moon (which is a cool name by the way) can run semi-fast on a Celeron 400Mhz with Windows XP. You learn to love the extra power of a Pentium 3, but New Moon is useable.

Did you try New Moon SSE with the UOC Patch? Your computer would be an interesting test bed for my patch, as I don't have a Celeron Coppermine system.

Edited by looking4awayout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, looking4awayout said:

Did you try New Moon SSE with the UOC Patch? Your computer would be an interesting test bed for my patch, as I don't have a Celeron Coppermine system.

I don't think such a celeron as his supports SSE, as my 533mhz one didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, i430VX said:

I don't think such a celeron as his supports SSE, as my 533mhz one didn't.

@roytam1 has a version of NM 27 for pre-SSE processors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

I don't see any (ADD ONS, except CAA) that everyone should have ...

I am opposed to the idea that RT should have to 'worry' about some 'internalized' ADD ON working with his Browsers. It seems like that ADD ONS (LEGACY) can 'stand on their own' -- so LET them do that.
(Evil Humor) And, @VistaLover enjoys solving SOME riddles related to 'Ghosts in the Old Machines' :)

https://o.rths.cf/boc-uxp/
RT has some ADD ONS (*.xpi files) listed for download at his above URL for BNAV Browser.

https://legacycollector.org/firefox-addons/
This above URL has Firefox LEGACY ADD ONS too. Just a straight forward download, no install involved.

https://legacycollector.org/firefox-addons/722/index.html
NoScript Security Suite

Edited by TechnoRelic
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TechnoRelic said:

I am opposed to the idea that RT should have to 'worry' about some 'internalized' ADD ON working with his Browsers.

I agree. If this were to be done at all, it should be done by @i430VX's installer. I could see the installer offering to download and install a few popular add-ons after extracting the browser.

21 hours ago, i430VX said:

I was considering adding optional plugin support to my installer for something like @looking4awayout's patch. I have that process planned in my head but I have no ideas on how I would automatically install "normal" add-ons (such as noScript) into the browser.

In theory @siria's method below would be ideal, but I'm not sure it would work in practice:

16 hours ago, siria said:

Thinking about it, just in theory, another way of including addons out-of-box is probably in the template folder for brand-new profiles:
installdir/browser/defaults/profile/extensions/...
Then it should show a Remove/Uninstall button on about:addons, but haven't tested.

That would install add-ons in a new profile anytime one is created. It may work in KM - I haven't looked - but in NM and Serpent, the defaults\profile\ folder seems to live in browser\omni.ja, and I'm not sure it's feasible to modify that file. It seems to be a nonstandard .zip format.

So that leaves you with storing the downloaded add-ons in the browser\extensions\ subfolder, which means they could be disabled but not removed easily (except of course by reinstalling). The installer would need to give the user a message to that effect.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mathwiz said:

@roytam1 has a version of NM 27 for pre-SSE processors.

Yes but what i meant was @looking4awayout had said to try the SSE version. All I was doing was clearing that up as IIRC that CPU doesnt support SSE
Therefore needing to use the noSSE one
:)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...